Universal Access To All Knowledge
Home Donate | Store | Blog | FAQ | Jobs | Volunteer Positions | Contact | Bios | Forums | Projects | Terms, Privacy, & Copyright
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Mar 1, 2010 7:56am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

RingO; not that it's my place to advise, but I had to actually look to find what you were getting at, and I agree completely with your sentiment, but as you have gathered, those kinds of battles were fought and lost long ago around here...ie, pleas for restraint. My approach is to simply ignore the names/posters associated with the ones I have been bothered by, and pretty soon, I am oblivious to them (that's why even though I didn't think you mean "me", I had no idea anything had "happened" cause I just skipped them...). I know for a newcomer that might end up feeling like you're skipping a great deal, but once we you have established rel'ships with enough folks, you almost always find one of the regulars to respond to, start up a new thread, etc., and just let the other stuff lie...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Mar 1, 2010 9:06am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

Well, I seriously am not a prude (and then I am also saved from being offended quite often because I just don't get stuff.) But apparently there is some kind of moderation around here somewhere that removes some things? I would nominate that stupid song for removal. Maybe I'm being uncool because it's making a point or something, but I was offended. Especially coming completely out of left field - the thread was about the US/Canada hockey game! WTF did the little sex abuse ditty have to do with anything? Does it occur to these guys there are people this has *happened to* who don't think it's so funny? (I don't mean me, but how about just some humanity guys? jokes about fucking your daughter aren't funny).

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: groovernut Date: Mar 1, 2010 2:37pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

I agree that the song is out of context, so what? It's not offensive.
You know it's a satire. It's not pro pedophile. Frank was making a statement about a very common taboo. Heck I think the song should get air play since it will stir up this nasty business that plagues this puritanical county...

SEX!!!!

What is offensive is you asking for censorship because you don't understand whats being said.

It should also be added that many people here will treat you differently because your a woman. I would not let on. It's pathetic to watch.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Mar 1, 2010 5:16pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

I guess I don't really agree that song is about sex.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: vapors Date: Mar 1, 2010 5:41pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

Hey - you’d think that most would accept the rope we feed them to pull them out of the pit they have dug, yet some will dig anew all the more furious. They seem to enjoy the depths.

Don’t feed the nasty trolls.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: groovernut Date: Mar 1, 2010 6:18pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

Look Vapors
I also have a vaporizer, I have a feeling we could be friends... so listen to this.

I'll dig you new hole until you get this....

Zappa manages to make fun of the GD in song yet still Jerry opens for his shows. (true)
(listen to Zappa you will not regret!)

O.K.

Zappa was a cool as it gets.

Being controversial was important in the days before we where all brain washed by the political correct police!


I'm no troll and Zappa ain't no peder-ass! Yes I posted quite a bit today. Out of rage nobody was willing to point out that that song is not offensive it simply deals with a controversial topic.

Zappa was into satire and social commentary. It was well known at the time.
Being offended by this song means you are a peder-ass yourself!

Dude where is my underground scene?


Vap, also you have never given me a rope to climb out on...so don't act like you are reaching out to make peace or any such thing.
I'll smoke the peace pipe with anybody here. I'll cover you back and be loyal to you. When I don't like you crap I'll tell you! Step up, BRO!


I admit I had to edit this post because I can't spell and have trouble string words together.... I do have a story to tell!


This post was modified by groovernut on 2010-03-02 02:16:27

This post was modified by groovernut on 2010-03-02 02:18:59

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: mickmac Date: Mar 1, 2010 6:05pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

I love Zappa. I dont love beating a deathless horsie.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: groovernut Date: Mar 1, 2010 6:15pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

I'll take that rope and ride that dead horse out of this thread...

thanks!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: groovernut Date: Mar 1, 2010 6:06pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

You don't think there is more to it?

Look up Zappa and you find he was not a pedder-ass. He is making a statement about repressed sexuality and it's not a nice picture. If I write a story about rape does that make me a rapist?

It's pretty obvious that Zappa is into satire... I figure everybody knew his shtick?

I doubt you are as simple minded as you sound.

How do you feel about Sugaree? I could list any number of GD songs that are sexist to max! If not sexist violent or just plan stupid. (TJ)

The GD had quite a reputation for being a macho kinda group and it was hard for Betty Cantor to hold her ground. I'm sure Donna did not have an easy job either... I mean it's time you open up your eyes. Somebody posting and old zappa song should not pierce you skin to the point where you are looking make a black list or need censorship.

I was hoping somebody else would chime in but the regulars where more interested in impressing the girl and did not step up to defend Zappa.


It was nice to see WT admit that naming people would get him in trouble and him letting us sort it out.

And IMHO (in my humble opinion) you are a prude if you think that song so offensive.


This post was modified by groovernut on 2010-03-02 02:00:39

This post was modified by groovernut on 2010-03-02 02:06:35

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: direwolf0701 Date: Mar 1, 2010 10:01pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

"I was hoping somebody else would chime in..."

ask and you shall receive.

Zappa crap/discussion notwithstanding, you sir are a dick (as is your Jackoff Hughes alter ego)

WT is too much a gentleman to point this out (but since I am not, i will.) You spell worse than my 10 year old > your prowess is the art of debate is, might i propose, severely lacking > and your intellect has apparently regressed to a period in evolution marked by the initial appearance of mitochondrial dna (assuming there was at one time a point from which you may have first regressed.)

To sum up (or reiterate, however you wish to view it).... you are a fuckin' tool.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: groovernut Date: Mar 2, 2010 9:01am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

yeah well Dire, I guess that makes two of us.

I prefer WT lighter touch to your insults.

I already mentioned I can't spell. I'm dyslexic and what I'm saying just is not that offensive...

Giving me a hard time about spelling = barrel, fish = shotgun...

Come on brother you don't want to be a Zappa hater, insecure about some random post guy do you? I got like no beef with you you know.


This post was modified by groovernut on 2010-03-02 17:01:13

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: direwolf0701 Date: Mar 2, 2010 9:23am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

cannot say i am a Zappa hater, but I have never really thought much of his music - more a personal/auditory decision rather than anything about Zappa as a person, etc.

and i will tip my cap to you for the decision not to return a vitriolic personal assault toward me. well done.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Mar 1, 2010 9:35pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

I would note that knowing Ring O as well as I do, it is the outright pedophile posts and pics that are upsetting (I agree completely), not necessarily lyrics. Knowing Zappa's penchant for pushing the envelope, I also wouldn't be so quick to dismiss or divine his true intention, since as you note, he was a complex man (an idiot too, for what he let his prostate do to him, but that's between him and his world view on the medical profession). However, I would also point out that this whole biz about however it is that I happen to chat with the gals, the very few that show now and again, is between me and them...and, the notion it is offensive to them, has been put to rest...how can you possibly take the innocent accolades that pass for a polite "how do you do" for anything other than respect? If you've come late to the conversation about the fact that Miss D and I chatted about going to a prom one fine day years ago, and that we connected off site for various reasons, but one of which was to be sure such jokes/quips/etc. were not misconstrued, how do you jump to the conclusion that I am some sort of misfit groveling for attn? It seems to me that the only one suppressing free speech would the one to continually comment on conversations between two individuals on the Forum in which neither of the individuals involved ever seem to have an issue with the tone, the words, or the implications...

As I have said many times before, when one single participant in "my" back and forth exchanges lets me know anything whatsoever was out of line, even mildly offensive or off base, that's all it'd take for me to back off, apologize, or whatever...but the odd thing is that has never happened...all that has happened is that the folks that don't know squat about the relationships (admittedly, odd little web relationships) seem to be upset by it...

What's that all about? What is so bothersome about it? I'd say it reveals more about the commentators than the two individuals involved...

Oh, and sorry if you're not the one that keeps mentioning it; you did hear, and in the one as Jacky Hughes, but maybe I've got that wrong.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: groovernut Date: Mar 2, 2010 9:02am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

WT No idea what pics or posts your referring to but the Zappa song was taken out of context and misunderstood.

BTW i find hearing about how you know people so well personally, boring, all I can see is the posts. If you knew me personally then what?


and yeah I'm not making any Jacky Hughes references... get it straight! WTF are you guys talking about? Wait , DON'T TELL ME, it sounds retarded already.


While slightly OT check this out! This is relevant to he tape thread also, BTW.


There were failings at the heart of the hippie mentality that led to its easy co-option by the record industry. The hippies' accommodation to class society was expressed in their idealism, which recycled one of the basic tenets of middle-class ideology: the belief that true values are above commerce, above the here-and-now of material society. Unlike rock'n'roll, this meant that its relation to a mass audience could only be hypocritical. It explains why hippie bands were invariably photographed in the countryside: the `non-commercial' (as opposed to Zappa's anti-commercial) floats outside time in idealized nature. By contrast, Absolutely Free (1967) depicted a cityscape blocked with traffic. Zappa mentioned how disappointed he was with the music of the San Francisco scene, and it is easy to see why: its anthemic, folk-based meanderings had little relationship to either R&B or Edgar Varese. Jefferson Airplane, the Grateful Dead, the Quicksilver Messenger Service provided a kind of pastel wallpaper to the hippie lifestyle.... Part of the hippie ethos was a hazy contempt for `product'; this entailed lifestyle soundtracks without great aesthetic ambitions. Everyone was only too happy to hear Jerry Garcia plunking away as they rolled their joints. These bands were explicitly pro-drugs, which directly contradicted what Zappa felt was a freak principle (though of course there had been plenty of drug-taking in LA). Most of all it was the philosophy that offended Zappa: in engaging with it he worked out a species of materialism, a defense of secular imagination and real-time capability that is truly inspiring (unless of course you are a hippie or an idealist, in which case he just bursts your balloon).

Freak Out! is still fascinating - not because it represents some purist alternative, but because it uses commercialism against itself. Zappa was still capable of playing off-the-leash, socking R&B (and showed this on `Trouble Every Day'), but he was too fascinated by contradiction to restrict himself to that base. The leering threat of Freak Out! a terrorizing hint that something unspeakably filthy is going on, was brilliantly coordinated with cover graphics and liner notes: it was designed to catch the interest of anyone as jaded as Zappa with the conformist rigmarole of high school. A record of `well-played' blues and avant-garde composition could not achieve the same miasma of defilement as achieved by perverting innocent pop.


http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1510/is_n89/ai_18109996/


Yeah the little world we live is ain't perfect!



This post was modified by groovernut on 2010-03-02 17:02:15

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Mar 2, 2010 9:40am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

sorry--you and the poster Jacky Hughes appear to be the same poster; isn't that obvious what was meant? If you're not, fine; but becuase you say the same things, the inference was reasonable, right?

And, frankly, anyone that uses the term "retarded" is just not worth the time of day...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: groovernut Date: Mar 2, 2010 10:35am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

Honestly WT, I don't know who you are talking about.

I have tried to talk sense with you but I guess anything other and a full on ass kissing does not work for you.

Just because I can't spell and don't kiss you royal behind does not mean I'm this other guy, whom I don't know or care about

May I suggest stepping out from under the rock you call your home?



Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Mar 3, 2010 8:45am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

Sorry then, the Jacky Hughes poster is someone different...but, you do still use the term "retarded", right?

Gotta defense for that one?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Mar 3, 2010 8:58am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

Honestly, old friend, I'd just let it go. I don't believe he's Jacky H., but he certainly is a bullshit baffler of the first order. Get back to enjoying your mountain while you can. (First there is a mountain then there is no mountain then there is ...)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Mar 3, 2010 9:08am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

Good for you--gotta finish my giant sized coffee first...and besides, the anti73 replies will be flooding in at any moment, so I'll give them a few moments.

Hey, at least the gals continue to stand by me, so that counts for something, eh? Hope all is well with you.

You know, I may be hypercritical, but I always felt that the sorts of satire Zappa espoused was no great shakes. I'd take Tom Lehrer any day (there, maybe that'll get him going...hmmm, scratch that).

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Mar 3, 2010 9:20am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

I'm happy to admit that I'm no great fan of Zappa's. He was an ok guitarist, had a degree of originality and tried to innovate a little, but definitely not as smart lyrically as many would like to believe he was. Satire need not mean losing your audience through offensiveness, Lehrer knew that. Then again, I'm sure there are many members of Zappa's audience who consider offensiveness to be a definite plus.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: bluedevil Date: Mar 2, 2010 9:46am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

http://tinyurl.com/yg2xppx

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Mar 2, 2010 9:47am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

"Sorry videos are not currently available in your country."

Discrimination! Out and out discrimination!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Mar 2, 2010 6:05pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

I guess I didn't see this yesterday but this business about you and "the girls" is completely silly. Just really.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Mar 3, 2010 8:47am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

Well, thank you for that...I figure that a little obsequi Es Ness is not necessarily a bad thing, but somehow, it REALLY riles up some of the other guys round here...the minute one of the gals says "oooeuuuwww!" then it's over...in reality though, I have spoken in almost the exact same tones with many a "guy" round here, and accused of being gay (fine by me) for it in the early years...

Really no biggie; but the fact that folks keep brining it up, and my worry wart anal retentive nature causes ME to keep revisiting it...so, all the positive reinforcment the better.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Mar 1, 2010 9:14am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

Couldn't agree more...started out here in the early "PM" days as one that tried to get all sorts of things "regulated", but the folks that run the site take a very hands off approach, so it has to be a real stinker. So, though I agree with you about that song, and many rap songs EG, I imagine the powers that be would place it under "free speech", blah, blah, blah...then we are "lost" because appealing to the "humanity" (which is what I always tried), generally makes it worse...so, given there are really fewer than five posters that do this kind of stuff, and again don't mean to sound smug/competent, but it doesn't take long to just tune them out.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Mar 1, 2010 9:44am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

Maybe you'd better tell me who they are then, so I will finally learn. There are people who freaked me out at first who I then realized are just a little rough around the edges and mean no harm ...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Mar 1, 2010 10:41am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

Hmmm--now you're going to get me in trouble! How about the converse: I can certify that you may find some foul language, but nothing to ruffle your feathers beyond that if you stick with posts by Arbuthnot, Ashes Rising,...[assumed you saw all of those so I deleted them--don't want to have any hurt feelings, right?] What I would recommend NEVER opening is a post by skies following one of mine--it won't be pretty.

This post was modified by William Tell on 2010-03-01 18:41:00

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Mar 1, 2010 10:50am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

thanks much and sorry for the threadjack here. back to dark star ...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: bluedevil Date: Mar 1, 2010 11:00am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

Both Dire and I are self-confessed assholes and are more likely than not to take a thread way off topic. If musical insight/knoweldge is what you seek, steer well away from our posts (but keep your eyes out for my upcoming comprehensive post on the history of Day Job).

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: direwolf0701 Date: Mar 1, 2010 11:22am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

me?? steering threads away from their intended purpose?? perish the thought!!

i am, however, eagerly awaiting your thesis on Day Job - i am certain it will be riveting and required reading for all heads who truly appreciate the GD at their musical, creative finest!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Capt. Cook Date: Mar 1, 2010 3:31pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

Could you possibly do the I Will Take You Home compendium/emotional barometer/detailed performance history and sort it such a way as to really capture, and not just attempt, we had enough of that in the freakin Olympics, but hold in your hand the raw essence of this raw and tender ballad is too simple a word for it...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Mar 1, 2010 11:30am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

I have no objection to off topic posts, for the record; just completely unexpected and pointless obscenities.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: groovernut Date: Mar 1, 2010 1:37pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

Dude, the only obscenity is in you mind. Your way of topic not to mention you being a prude and judgmental dick.

I am very glad the folks who run this site UNDERSTAND the nature of free speech because it's clear that many here don't.

The last thing we need here are more moderators. (self described or otherwise)

Censorship is hardly called for, so

TOUGHEN UP KID.

Just remember you might be a prude! Frank called you out!


This post was modified by groovernut on 2010-03-01 21:37:45

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: cush212 Date: Mar 1, 2010 1:45pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

First off, ringolevio is a woman, so why don't you treat her with a little respect stupid?

2nd, This is a public forum, do you talk like that at your starbucks or supermarket? Do they even allow you in???

3rd, I first heard Zappa live in 1966... Where were you? Did you even have pampers to poop in, or speak into as the case may be???

4th, Your not worth any more of my time. Find out who you're calling out before you do it again dumbass!!!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: groovernut Date: Mar 1, 2010 5:19pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

Dear Cush.

I don't care if she is a girl or a boy. In this context it's irrelevant. (unlike you I'm not attempting to impress her =)
I respect folks for there intellectual capacity amongst other things...

If this place is a Starbucks get me the hell out!

Sorry to hear you are so old. Again it's irrelevant, so don't worry.
Frank was prolific did not have to see him in 66 to get the satire...

Thanks for your time... I love you just the same as I love you all. I don't mind sharing my time with you, brother...sister what ever... In fact if we where stilling round the hookah we would be fast friends for sure...

To those so easily offended. Feel free to start you own forum where only your friends can agree with you...

I like the Dark Star, I despise the narrow mind, I call it how I see it. Feel free to have YOUR VERY OWN OPINION.

Just so you know, # 4 is called a COP OUT.... you got nothing why did you even speak up? (I suspect your attempting to impress the girls)

This post was modified by groovernut on 2010-03-01 23:49:21

This post was modified by groovernut on 2010-03-02 01:19:13

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Mar 1, 2010 5:48pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

As I noted in the other thread, it is possible I overreacted. It's certainly possible I don't get the song. And yes I know the dead were sexists too .. just not that bad (jeez).

So it's about sexual repression? - if you're sexually repressed you'll turn out like this guy who wants to do his daughter? Hm. Not *quite* sure I buy that, but I'll think about it.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: groovernut Date: Mar 1, 2010 10:50pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satire

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Zappa


http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/7248602/the_immortals__the_greatest_artists_of_all_time_71_frank_zappa


http://www.deaddisc.com/GDFD_Refs.htm

Hey I'm not a very good writer and the concepts in my mind are not simple to communicate so I appreciate you working with me on getting this across!

we both overreacted.


This post was modified by groovernut on 2010-03-02 06:50:51

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Mar 2, 2010 6:10pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

P.S. Sorry I really could not get back today, but do intend to look at your links and appreciate.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: ringolevio Date: Mar 2, 2010 5:50am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

Thanks for this - I will take a look at the links at lunch today.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: vapors Date: Mar 1, 2010 1:58pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

I disagree – I often can’t help but wonder what a little bit of moderation could do for this forum. You may enjoy exercising your “free speech” - to me you’ve shown nothing worth listening to.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Mar 1, 2010 2:08pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

It seems evident that your espousal of free speech doesn’t extend to including people who might disagree with you. ‘Toughen up kid’ is hardly an invitation to rational debate is it?

Paedophilia IS an obscenity; it’s something that rightly makes most people feel very uncomfortable and which they would rather not even think about, never mind discuss. However, I absolutely believe that Ringolevio could debate you into the ground on the subject. I would just love to hear your defence of kiddy porn on the grounds of freedom of expression.

The sexual exploitation of minors is a deeply serious topic that doesn’t deserve to be half-wittedly interjected into a hockey game discussion because some fucking idiot found a song with a Canadian placename in it. That is just trivialising and demeaning and, Ringolevio will correct me if I’m wrong, that’s what’s so objectionable about the whole thing.

Just remember you might be an asshole.

I’m calling you out.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: groovernut Date: Mar 2, 2010 9:43am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

I would debate her fair and square...

Toughen Up is barely hard language...she can handle it.



This is about a very socially conscience Frank Zappa song...
It's call satire. It's NOT a pro pedophile song dude! It's about how repressed and internally tormented "the squares" are...

open up your mind.. 99 percent of your fears will never come to pass.

And Rob, you have the right to your opinion... what ever that is anyway?

Love and grass.
the groover...


This post was modified by groovernut on 2010-03-02 17:43:54

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: bluedevil Date: Mar 1, 2010 2:30pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

who's wearing pojamas?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Mar 1, 2010 3:00pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

I wouldn’t be too sure of your debating skills if I were you.

This is fundamentally NOT about what Zappa hoped to achieve by writing this ‘very social conscience’ (sic) song because I’ll bet he didn’t want its message to be trivialised by having it taken out of context and used for cheap laughs. And just exactly how is it about ‘squares’ being ‘repressed and internally tormented’? Enlighten me, oh wise one!

My mind is open – just not so open that you can hear the wind whistle through…

Debate me, boy.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: groovernut Date: Mar 1, 2010 3:50pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

Look dude,

You are right Frank did not mean for his song to be quoted like that... no argument.

The offense here is that some claimed the song was some pedophile anthem. It ain't. I believe that you are a smart person. Read the lyrics. Think about it for a second. You don't need me to debate this. The man he sings about is not a hero. Frank is describing a condition that is highly uncool. Frank is pointing out how repressed sexually is a bad thing. Plain and simple.

Ringvo (whatever) had no reason to be offended, it was random that's about all. So to me the posturing around the false offense was VERY offensive to me! The call for censorship is lame. If she is strictly a scholar then she had no business reading a thread about hockey anyway...

Don't cry Wolf for no reason or you will be ignored when you need help.


BTW Robby, this the wrong place to try to impress with your debating skills... LOL give me a break, are you running for office? Just so you know, I'll debate you any old time you think your up of a good whipping.

If you think you have a leg to stand on I would like to hear about it.


This post was modified by groovernut on 2010-03-01 23:44:18

This post was modified by groovernut on 2010-03-01 23:50:53

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Mar 1, 2010 3:47pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

Before we go any further I would like to withdraw my earlier suggestion that you might be an asshole.

You ARE an asshole.

“If she is strictly a scholar then she had no business reading a thread about hockey anyway...” What the fuck are you on, son? Hockey is off limits for scholars? It’s just for dim bulbs like you, huh? Hey, no censorship, except let’s not have those fucking intellectuals watching our hockey games and making fun of our lame sexist gags. Right fucking on!

As, somewhat unsurprisingly, it seems to have escaped your notice, let me point out to you that this actually is a place where debating skills count for something. This is an open forum where views are exchanged and defended – and if you can’t handle that then fuck off back to kiddy korner. Dude.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: groovernut Date: Mar 1, 2010 4:06pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

Obviously you lack any sense of humor kiddo.

The scholar bit is called humor. Remember the dead where just a rock band...obviously we all are dead heads...

You have nothing to base your debate on. Your wrong about the song is all.

You have lost the argument.

You end with my exact argument, Toughen up Kid.

another way to say...

if you can't play with the big dogs stay on the porch.


You debating sucks, I'll bet you loose the election!

Ohh yeah and it's me pointing you to the kiddy corner... off to bed with you . no dinner!


Furthermore calling me and "asshole" is in fact very a very assholy thing to do.

Very mature Rob.

For the LAST TIME it was not a SEXIST gag! You simply did not understand the song...if that song is a sexist you are insulting and misrepresenting Zappa and that kiddo is offensive... get it? It's was a random gag. The song is not offensive...it just had some random Canada reference. Ring-y did not understand others made it worse and in the end Zappa looked like a peder-ass... uncool!



This post was modified by groovernut on 2010-03-02 00:06:20

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Mar 1, 2010 4:09pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

A sense of humour is only triggered by something funny. Admittedly you are funny, but just not in the way that you think.

How can I have lost the argument when you haven’t even begun to argue?

Fish + barrel + shotgun = no fun for me.

And by the way, retrospectively editing your posts in the forlorn hope that it’ll make you look better doesn’t make you a big dog. It makes you a pussy.

Bye bye!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: groovernut Date: Mar 1, 2010 8:36pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

Look Rob.

Let's leave it like this.

Rob(wordhammingfool) thinks Zappa is a peder-ass.

I think Zappa was cool and had a good message.

Rob would rather toss Zappa under the bus so he looks cool to some random forum member... You called me names..

You have very weak debating skills, better you face that here than at starbucks...

Everybody edits there posts...snowflake!

You clam we have not started, because you are loosing. Sounds to me like you just can't admit that you where wrong.. you did not read the lyrics and just typed....

In the end I can be friends will all, I'm just not going to let you talk shit about Zappa is all.




This post was modified by groovernut on 2010-03-02 00:24:48

This post was modified by groovernut on 2010-03-02 04:36:41

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: direwolf0701 Date: Mar 1, 2010 8:54pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

"You clam we have not started, because you are loosing. Sounds to me like you just can't admit that you where wrong.."



and I thought that I was the worst in failing spell checking!

furthermore - dude, it might be best to let it rest. you ARE "loosing" the argument (either that or not quite getting what the discussion is really about)

are you and Jackie Hughes one in the same person? your verbal skills are similarly challenged. just asking...

This post was modified by direwolf0701 on 2010-03-02 04:54:45

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: groovernut Date: Mar 2, 2010 9:46am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

Run away with you weak arguments or make a point that is not wrong, insulting or weak.

See ya Rob.



This post was modified by groovernut on 2010-03-02 17:46:40

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: groovernut Date: Mar 1, 2010 6:24pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

I'm not one to run away Rob...

Made my points:

-Franks song is not pro peder-ass.

-Ring-o need not have taken offense, she over reacted, did not get the reference. Should have looked up who Zappa was!

-Nobody had the balls to defend Zappa.

-People forget how important free speech is until it's to late.

-many folks in the forum treat women differently then men. (in a creepy and offense way)

-the forum IS NOT starbucks and much closer to a free speech zone! (thank god!)

-the Canadians winning the game is not without controversy.

-new and improved posts are not always to be taken very serious.

-we all need more humor

-light into ashes is as close to a professor as we are going to get round here.

THANKS AGAIN! LiA Rocks



You decide if they are weak.... clearly I could have been more constructive today.


I also learned a lot about Dark star. In the end it a tune that I can only relate to sometimes. There are some epic DS out there but I don't feel bad skipping it from time to time... NOTHING is sacred.

This post was modified by groovernut on 2010-03-02 02:24:08

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Mar 2, 2010 9:59am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

If my point was at the end of a sharpened stick being applied to your nether regions I doubt you'd get it. I am no longer inclined to apply my head to the brick wall of your invincible ignorance so do us all a favour and cease and desist the tedious post amendments. And to think you had the brass-balled nerve to call Tell boring...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: groovernut Date: Mar 2, 2010 11:16am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

Rob I know you think you got it all worked out... but you don't even know the meaning of "satire". You had ample opportunity to prove yourself smart or insightful.

I make no such claims about myself, I'm a simple man with spelling problems that has his OWN opinions and does not kiss the behinds of other men.

I never (still don't) have an issue with you. I find you entertaining.

Question Authority!





This post was modified by groovernut on 2010-03-02 19:16:31

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Mar 2, 2010 11:16am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

Though the world is so full of a number of things,
I know we should all be as happy as
But are we?
No, definitely no, positively no.
Decidedly no. Mm mm.
Short people have long faces and
Long people have short faces.
Big people have little humor
And little people have no humor at all!
And in the words of that immortal buddy
Samuel J. Snodgrass, as he was about to be lead
To the guillotine:

Make 'em laugh
Make 'em laugh

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: cush212 Date: Mar 1, 2010 2:16pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

Down boy...

;)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: bluedevil Date: Mar 1, 2010 2:17pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dark Star 1971

I section that motion and extend kudos for dropping in the subsequent Zappa reference....